Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
He had not yet explicitly equated the "day" in which Adam (and the whole human race) dies with the seventh day of Creation when I posted the above, but it was the logical application of his statement as quoted in my post. And he apparently agrees with this assessment, in the post immediately proceeding yours.where was he talking about the 7th day
Wow! It's amazing what people will deliberately lie about. No wonder I have him on ignore.where was he talking about the 7th day
KWcrazy said:The people were divided by languages at the tower of Babel.
Adam did surely die. Death became assured the moment that he ate from the tree of knowledge of good and evil. He traded immortality for such knowledge, and because of his actions he brought death unto himself and his descendants. God never said "In the instant" he ate he would die immediately.Split rock said:What did God mean when he said Adam would die if he ate the forbidden fruit? He sure didn't die. "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall surely die" (Genesis 2:17).
I actually agree with you on at least some of your interpretation. But that is irrelevant to the point that I am making... and that is that the bible is not crystal clear on anything. If dad can interpret that "split" as the breaking up of pangea and the bible "clearly" states that Adam would die "in that day" and he didn't, this all points to ambiguity.I think so and the references I double checked with believed so as well.
No, He said IN, not on. Genesis 2:17 "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die." Death became a surety, though it was not immediate.
This is actually one of those times when the word day (yowm) does not mean a single day because it had no quantifier. God did not say Adam would die ON the day or that he would IMMEDIATELY die. The devil knew that, and told Eve she would not die when he ate it. She ate and didn't die, then Adam ate and didn't die. Death, however, was assured because man had been given only one law and still couldn't keep it.
I actually agree with you on at least some of your interpretation. But that is irrelevant to the point that I am making... and that is that the bible is not crystal clear on anything. If dad can interpret that "split" as the breaking up of pangea and the bible "clearly" states that Adam would die "in that day" and he didn't, this all points to ambiguity.
I didn't say it was clear on EVERYTHING, but in relation to the creation and the most important parts of the Bible it's very clear. "The evening and the morning" is very clear. "Fifteen cubits above the mountains" is also very clear. "Thou shalt not" leaves nothing to interpret. It isn't the things that are mysterious that bother people, it's the clear unambiguous statements that conflict with what they want to believe.I actually agree with you on at least some of your interpretation. But that is irrelevant to the point that I am making... and that is that the bible is not crystal clear on anything. If dad can interpret that "split" as the breaking up of pangea and the bible "clearly" states that Adam would die "in that day" and he didn't, this all points to ambiguity.
So is the claim simply rhetorical hyperbole for the sake of motivation.....
I cannot speak for all creationists, but I have seen the evolution theory turned a fellow classmate into not believing in Jesus Christ any more.
So let's address that.
What does the evolution theory does that makes one not believe any more?
#1) To think that God did not really mean what He has said.
Isaiah 55:11 So shall my word be that goeth forth out of my mouth: it shall not return unto me void, but it shall accomplish that which I please, and it shall prosper in the thing whereto I sent it.
If the first day wasn't really the first day with an evening and a morning, then what else is not true?
1 John 2:21 I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and that no lie is of the truth.
How does that not cause doubt about the word of His promise, especially after Jesus had vouched for the scriptures in reproving the Pharisees?
John 10:35If he called them gods, unto whom the word of God came, and the scripture cannot be broken;
So what about this promise below?
Romans 10:13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.
What? Will that not lead someone to doubt as to maybe it will take billions of years or even more since it took God that long to create them?
So? What's a billion years to God? Who among us has the power to bind Him to our timetable?
If God wanted to create the world in six days, He could. If He wanted to create it in six minutes, He could. But if He wanted to do it over 4.5 billion years, why is that a problem?
#2) Would believing in the evolution theory means that Adam was not responsible for bringing death into the world?
Most likely -- but does that make death any less a problem? More to the point, does it make Jesus any less a solution?
1 Corinthians 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead. 22 For as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive.
So what is the big deal with God in having any life & death before the Biblcal creation account if the central point of creation and the fall all centered on Christ defeating death for the last time?
As in... death can still come from elsewhere but not because of the origin of sin?
#3) Would it mean that Christ referencing the first marriage was not really the first marriage?
Matthew 19:4 And he answered and said unto them, Have ye not read, that he which made them at the beginning made them male and female, 5 And said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they twain shall be one flesh? 6 Wherefore they are no more twain, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder.
If they believe that Adam & Eve was not the first couple but an eventual evolved couple or a symbolic representation of the origin of Israel's family tree regardless of the record of genealogy, is Christ's victory over sin & death really assured?
I can see why believers stop believing in Jesus Christ because the evolution theory makes Jesus a liar and a vain "god" with no assurances.
In spite of the fact that He has risen from the dead.
So fellow believers in Jesus Christ: are you really going to accept man's ability to measure time when God has matured His creation in numerous places in the Bible account of creation?
Like... how the speed of light cannot be the measuring stick on how old the universe is when God created the source of those lights in the heavens and filled in the gap with those lights to be governing the earth that day when He spoke it to be doing.
So you either believe in His words in what He has said or... you are leaving the door wide open for the devil to sow doubt in your fellow believer's ear by whispering "Did God really say that?".
Like it or not, playing with theistic evolution will eventually lead a believer to stumble.
The devil isn't going to let that opportunity go by when a believer is doubting God's word. The devil will make him doubt more & more until he just doesn't believe in God anymore, regardless of how "science" keeps updating and changing what they believe to be true of the evolution theory as proof that they are stumbling around in the dark.
And that's sad, because there's really no reason they should be at odds -- any conflict is in the mind of the believer.
It may force a person to question their understanding of God -- and if they never came to the realization that their understanding of the infinite and almighty creator of the Universe may be finite and fallible to say the least, then it might be a bit too much for them to handle.
If you read this closely, it's "no lie is the truth" -- which really isn't as profound as it originally sounded.
And yet, like it or not, the world is full of theistic evolutionists who are not stumbling at all. This would be the other thing driving people away in droves -- your total disconnect form reality.
Seems pretty clear form here which of us is stumbling around in the dark. You give people an ultimatum; force them to choose your way or the highway, and act oh-so-surprised when they choose the highway.
The evolution theory has never been proven,
but the world is talking about it as if it was,
all the while ignoring how the evolution theory is still being modified,
recanted in some places,
and other areas are still in the process of determining that brings the evolution theory in question.
I cannot speak for all creationists, but I have seen the evolution theory turned a fellow classmate into not believing in Jesus Christ any more.
So let's address that
Doesn't change the fact that believers not rooted in the word are offended by the word because they believe in the evolution theory over His words.
When something is causing a brother to stumble is why we should not speak of it, but avoid it. His words are enough for us to live by.
1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
If the evolution theory overthrows the faith of some, how can you ignore this instruction as a fellow believer and follower of Jesus Christ as His disciple out of love for believers in Christ that are not rooted in the word?
The evolution theory has never been proven, but the world is talking about it as if it was, all the while ignoring how the evolution theory is still being modified, recanted in some places, and other areas are still in the process of determining that brings the evolution theory in question.
So not proven yet. That's stumbling around in the dark in my view.
You are only proving my point as they are not rooted in the word to know the truth so as to be not offended by the word to be driven away.
I am sorry that you saw my post as a personal attack on you & all thiestic evolutionists, brother, but let's be realistic about the situation here. If there was no evolution theory, believers not rooted in the word would not be driven away because of it ( although there are other lies in the world as well as peer pressure that can still do that for not being rooted in the word).
If there was no Bible, but just the evolution theory, then I would imagine the world would be an even more of a dog eat dog mentality because everyone would be living on bigotry and ambitions that natural selection would be the just cause for murder, abortion, euthanasia. suicide, & wars.
No corrupt tree can produce a good fruit and no good tree can produce an evil fruit. Whethor or not you agree with this application for discernment, I just see the evolution theory as a corrupt tree for what it is.
I didn't say it was clear on EVERYTHING, but in relation to the creation and the most important parts of the Bible it's very clear. "The evening and the morning" is very clear. "Fifteen cubits above the mountains" is also very clear. ..... It isn't the things that are mysterious that bother people, it's the clear unambiguous statements that conflict with what they want to believe.
.
"Fifteen cubits above the mountains" is also very clear.
Long live the KJVO movement!KWCrazy,
Why is it "very clear" to you and yet Bible-believing, fundamentalist followers of Jesus Christ committed to faithfully translating the Bible have struggled with the Hebrew Masoretic Text of Genesis 7:19-20 for centuries?
What do YOU know that they don't? Did they not pray enough before translating it? Were they not "true Christians"? Did Satan deceive them?
Can the Christ-follower be sure of the correct translation? How can he/she know for certain which of the two traditional translations are correct? Did God INTEND for us to know? Does it matter?
Has God given us the answer?
Is it possible that what the Bible leaves ambiguous and unanswered about Noah's flood, God's Book of Creation answers very clearly?
Probably the best solution to that is to regard the Genesis creation story as not literal. This is easy to accept when looking at some of the other problems with Genesis 1.
It is just common knowledge of what we know about our physical world today that those two things are not factual. If one is willing to accept that, it only makes sense that creating man out of a lump of mud and woman from a rib does not have to be literal either. Consider what the people of that time knew about their physical environment and how they perceived things. It make sense in that "time", but not today with what we know. What are we going to believe, what man has written down being unknowingly ignorant of the working of their physical environment, or the physical evidence left by God that is contained in the earth and stellar space?
- Plants were made and bearing fruit prior to the sun being created?
- Land plants appear before any animals?
Grasping reality doesn't mean we have to abandon God.
When something is causing a brother to stumble is why we should not speak of it, but avoid it. His words are enough for us to live by.
1 Timothy 6:20 O Timothy, keep that which is committed to thy trust, avoiding profane and vain babblings, and oppositions of science falsely so called: 21 Which some professing have erred concerning the faith. Grace be with thee. Amen.
KJ English ≠ Elizabethan EnglishCan we assume that you understand that the context of Paul's Letter to Timothy is that what Elizabethan English of 1611 KJV calls "science " is derived from the Greek word GNOSIS ("knowledge") because the Apostle Paul was talking about a HERESY, the heresy know as GNOSTICISM.
But light was created before the plants.
The plants needed to be created before the animals to provide food for them.
Which is easier to believe, that an intelligent designer created everything or that everything came from nothing, life spontaneously appeared from non-life, evolved the ability to reproduce itself in the first generation, and through a series of beneficial cancers, life evolved from the goo, through the zoo to me and you?
I choose to believe what God's inspired word clearly tells me in scripture.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?